Players are placed in pairs: one player is the Proposer, the other the Responder. The Proposer proposes a split $100. If the Responder accepts the proposal, payoffs are determined by the accepted proposal. If the Responder rejects the proposal, both earn nothing.

This game teaches students about how social norms such as fairness and altruism may result in behaviors that deviate from game-theoretic predictions.

This game differs from our standard Ultimatum Game in three ways. First, every player plays both as a Proposer and a Responder. Second, Responders indicate the smallest offer they would accept rather than accepting or rejecting a known offer. Finally, total payoffs are the sum of payoffs as Proposer and payoffs as Responder, with each player’s offer being matched with every player’s smallest acceptable offer.

In the ultimatum game, one student makes a proposal and the other student either accepts or rejects the offer. If the proposal is accepted, the students split the money according to the agreed offer. Otherwise, both students earn nothing.

This game teaches students about how social norms such as fairness and altruism may result in behaviors that deviate from game-theoretic predictions.

In this game, each player is either a Proposer or a Responder. In MobLab’s Ultimatum (Strategy Method), each player makes a choice in both roles, indicating a minimum acceptable offer for her choice as Responder.

In the two candidate election game, students acting as candidates, simultaneously choose a policy platform to run on, represented by position on a line between 0 and 100. Voters, automated by computers, cast their vote for the candidate closest to their own ideal policy. Different voters have different ideal policies. The candidate with the most votes wins the election.

This game teaches students about candidate competition in majority rule elections, and the Median Voter Theorem. The game also shows how candidates adjust their platforms during the course of an election in response to polling information.

In the trust game, one student plays the role of an investor who decides how much of his money to invest with the second student, who plays a financial planner. The financial planner receives the investment and the money grows. The financial planner then decides how much to return to the investor and keeps the remainder.

This game teaches students about the nature of trust and how it can be sustained over time. When the game is repeated, the students can explore issues concerning reciprocity.

In the tragedy of the commons game, students act as fishermen and simultaneously decide how many hours to fish. A fisherman’s catch depends on the number of hours he fishes and the total number of hours fished by all. The more the group fishes, the more the available stock of fish diminishes and the fewer fish one can catch each hour.

Teach students about common pool resources and how self-interested use can cause harm to others (by creating negative externalities) and result in a tragedy of the commons. Explore how regulations, such as taxes or subsidies, can mitigate the over-use of natural resources.

In this game, the fishery returns to full health after each period, so the societal cost of overfishing is borne in the current period: the overall level of fishing this period determines the returns from an hour fishing. For a game where over-exploitation of a common-pool resource this period reduces future ability to benefit from a common-pool resource, see MobLab&rsqup;s Commons: Fishery game.

With surveys, MobLab is a classroom response (polling) system. A Survey is a collection of information screens and questions (multiple choice, numeric response, Likert scale, slider, or text). Your students respond using their Internet-connected device.

Survey use is only limited by your imagination! Uses include making sure students understand game instructions, and to collect post-game feedback.

In groups of two, students must simultaneously decide to play one of two actions in the Stag Hunt game: Stag or Hare. The intersection of their chosen actions determines the students’ payoffs.

This is a famous coordination game that teaches students about strategic uncertainty, and provides an example of multiple equilibria in games. Stag is a risky strategy that only gives a high payoff if the other student chooses it too. Hare guarantees a medium payoff. Stag-Stag is the more efficient Nash equilibrium, but exposes players to risk. Hare-Hare is an inefficient Nash equilibrium, but is safe.

In each round, each of two firms sequentially chooses output of a homogenous good (direct flights). The firm choosing first (LeadAir) knows that the second-moving firm (FollowAir) will learn the leader’s output choice before choosing its output. Market price is determined by a linear demand curve. At the end of each round, each firm learns market production and price and both firms’ profits.

In groups of two, students must simultaneously decide to play one of three actions: Rock, Paper, Scissors. The intersection of their chosen actions determines the students’ payoffs.

This is a famous game that teaches students about zero-sum games and mixed strategies using this favorite childhood game. Each student must randomize between actions in order to be unpredictable. This becomes especially evident if the same pair of students play it repeatedly.